- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. WP:SNOW. postdlf ( talk) 01:25, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
List of Squares in Minsk
- List of Squares in Minsk ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Indiscriminate, seemingly irrelevant small list. No explanation on notability. Other issues as well. South Nashua ( talk) 21:51, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Not at all indiscriminate: it's a list of all the public squares in the city of Minsk. Public squares, or plazas, are usually notable, and it's reasonable to have lists of them, such as
List of squares in Malta or
List of squares in Copenhagen. (When this discussion is closed, the article's title should be corrected for capitalization.)
Pburka (
talk) 22:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
-
List of squares in Malta is not a good example to follow. Almost the entire list consist of redlinks and original research.
List of squares in Copenhagen is a better example of what list articles of this nature should be.
Ajf773 (
talk) 22:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- There's nothing wrong with redlinks—in fact redlinks are one of the advantages lists have over categories. However the lack of sources in the Malta page is problematic.
Pburka (
talk) 23:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, redlinks have their places. Although an entire list of redlinks (apart from two entries) questions WP:LISTN. Anyhow, we are not discussing that article in this debate WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Ajf773 ( talk) 23:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- There's nothing wrong with redlinks—in fact redlinks are one of the advantages lists have over categories. However the lack of sources in the Malta page is problematic.
Pburka (
talk) 23:02, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- I've updated the article to use a table, with quite a bit more information. I've also boldly fixed the capitalization, as the page seems likely to survive. Pburka ( talk) 23:58, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
-
List of squares in Malta is not a good example to follow. Almost the entire list consist of redlinks and original research.
List of squares in Copenhagen is a better example of what list articles of this nature should be.
Ajf773 (
talk) 22:58, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Yes, a perfectly reasonable complement to Category:Squares in Minsk, per WP:CLN. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 22:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 22:30, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 23:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belarus-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 23:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Cities are notable and public squares within cities are among the most notable places within cities. So it makes perfect sense to have an article listing the squares of the city. The article would be improved, however, by having short descriptions of the squares. And as noted by User:Pburka, there is a List of squares in Malta or List of squares in Copenhagen. In addition, it would be helpful to expand the Wikipedia Town square article. For example, the BBC has an interesting article on The Violent History of Public Squares. And there is this interesting article too: Designing A New Town Square For Our Crowded Urban Future. It would also be interesting to have a "History of town squares" section. There is material on this topic as well: The Hidden Origin of the Town Square. Knox490 ( talk) 03:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Squares in Minsk. North America 1000 13:30, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Enough list entries to satisfy WP:LISTN. Needs a bit of polishing up but it's a new page so WP:NOTDUP. Ajf773 ( talk)
- Keep: I agree with Knox490's reasoning above. -- Guy Macon ( talk) 16:25, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.